On 5 June 2016 at 18:40, Kent Fredric <kentfred...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 6 June 2016 at 04:31, rindeal <dev.rind...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Isn't no commit approach better than having broken commit + revert >> commit? > > > Huh? > > Its doing "replicate to github on pass using a merge commit".
I'd like to see the master branch free of commits which do not pass CI, instead of having broken commits and holding master back until revert commits are introduced.
